Talk:Scarpin's Revelaspell
Do we know how exactly the spell reveals hidden things. I mean, it would obviously show hidden secrets when Hermione performs it on the Half Blood Prince's book. However, we see Ernie Macmillian performing in over his poison in NEWT Potions, Harry and Ron quickly copying him. How would the blended poison reveal it's contents? Is this really Specialis Revelio? See also above. Do we really have any proof that "Specialis Revelio" is the same thing as Scarpin's Revelaspell? I mean, here is what the book gives us: "Hermione was now waving her wand enthusiastically over her cauldron. Unfortunately, they could not copy the spell she was doing because she was now so good at non-verbal incantations that she did not need to say the words aloud. Ernie Macmillan, however, was muttering, 'specialis revelio!' over his cauldron, which sounded impressive, so Harry and Ron hastened to imitate him. It took Harry only five minutes to realize that his reputation as the best potion-maker in the class was crashing around his ears." Of course, it's possible that Harry simply screwed up the casting of the spell, but it's also possible that Specialis Revelio could have no use in this instance, that whatever it is, it was not Scarpin's Revelaspell. ProfessorTofty (talk) 21:37, September 26, 2012 (UTC) :I don't interpret that passage the same way you do. Note that (at least in my copy of the book), there's a paragraph break between "hastened to imitate him" and "It took Harry only five minutes" in the text you quoted. It seems, when I read it, that Harry starts to blunder in the preparation of the antidote in the steps following Specialis Revelio. :Slughorn says that after casting Scarpin's Revelaspell comes the tricky part: "assuming we have achieved correct identification of the potion's ingredients by Scarpin's Revelaspell, our primary aim is not the relatively simple one of selecting antidotes to those ingredients in themselves, but to find that added component which will, by an almost alchemical process, transform these disparate elements —". This, and the complexity of Hermione's antidote -- fifty-two ingredients half-way -- strongly imply, in my opinion, that this is where Harry and Ron lose it. :On other note, why would Macmillian be using a spell other than Scarpin's Revelaspell, when Slughorn named it mere minutes before? Casting (potentially) inappropriate spells at a lit cauldron strikes me as a very unwise thing to do. -- [[User:Seth Cooper| Seth Cooper ]][[User talk:Seth Cooper| owl post!]] 23:12, September 26, 2012 (UTC) ::Regarding your first point - yeah, I suppose that could be true. But it seemed to me as though Harry was lost from the go and never identified anything. I could be wrong, though. Regarding your second point, though, that's very true, but that's exactly what Harry and Ron did. "Macmillan, however, was muttering, 'specialis revelio!' over his cauldron, which sounded impressive, so Harry and Ron hastened to imitate him." Harry and Ron copied him simply because it seemed like he knew what he was doing, even though they apparently had no idea if Specialis Revelio was the right spell to use or not. ProfessorTofty (talk) 23:37, September 26, 2012 (UTC) :::For the record, I remain unconvinced that Specialis Revelio is Scarpin's Revelaspell. Again, you say that casting a potentially inappropriate spell at a lit cauldron is a dumb thing to do, and yet this is exactly what Harry and Ron did. They copied a spell simply because it "sounded impressive," not having a clue if it was the right spell to use. And if you're crediting Macmillan with having more intelligence than Harry and Ron, let's not forget that Harry and Ron are not dumb. Both were intelligent enough to pass well enough to make into N.E.W.T. potions, not getting an Outstanding notwithstanding. ProfessorTofty (talk) 00:00, October 25, 2012 (UTC) ::::Honestly, whilst I do for the most part agree with you, Professor, whilst at the same time, it does seem a bit odd that they'd be casting a random spell at a lit cauldron. All the same, you do make a good point. --Hunniebunn 00:12, October 25, 2012 (UTC) :::::Since you asked for my opinion, Prof. Tofty, I agree with Seth's interpretation here. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 00:11, October 28, 2012 (UTC) ::::::Alright, well then I guess I'll let this one go then, unless some other canon information is released that would lead us to believe that the two aren't one and the same. ProfessorTofty (talk) 00:18, October 28, 2012 (UTC) Specialis Revelio, Part II So, as pointed out above, there is some doubt that Specialis Revelio is the same thing as Scarpin's Revelaspell, namely that nothing happened when Harry and Ron used it. However, the Scholastic official site gives the effects of Specialis Revelio as "reveals any bewitchings or hexings". Scarpin's Revelaspell is used to reveal ingredients in the potion. I therefore now feel that they are different. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 15:22, April 21, 2013 (UTC) :Well, my feelings on the matter are already clear. I completely agree; the two are not the same spell. And to just add in one other thing, the text states that Harry and Ron could not copy what Hermione was doing, "Ernie MacMillan, however, was muttering 'specialis revelio'" (emphasis added), as if to draw a distinction between whatever spell Hermione was casting and what Ernie was doing. ProfessorTofty (talk) 01:01, April 22, 2013 (UTC) ::Agreed. One more vote and they will be separated. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 01:08, April 22, 2013 (UTC) :::Bumping. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 00:14, May 11, 2013 (UTC)